Wednesday, 15 March 2017

Israel Apartheid Week - A Contradiction in Terms

Source; Haaretz

Every year, many universities around the world hold an event on their
campuses know as "Israel Apartheid Week". The event is justified by
the fact that it brings the so-called discriminatory behaviour of Israel
to the attention of the general public to allow people to know "what is
really happening in Israel and the Palestinian Territories". There
could be no greater contradiction in terms than this.

I
am trying to work out why the focus is on Israel's reportedly
discriminatory behaviour in particular? Why Israel, as opposed to
discrimination by the Turks against the Kurds, or discrimination by the
Chinese against the Nepalese, or by the Russians against the Ukrainians
in Crimea and other former Soviet countries, or the discrimination in
many African countries, or discrimination by many Muslim countries
against their minorities and foreign workers, and even their own
citizens? There are surely so many countries on the list of those
behaving badly, that universities could mark some country's
discriminatory behaviour every week of the year. While one form of
discrimination does not justify another, the question is why Israel is
singled out for an apartheid week of its own? Surely this is
discriminatory in itself? It brings into question the real motivations
of those who are the main instigators behind this highly questionable
event, and how come it has gained so much traction around the world that
it is repeated on an annual basis?

The first question
that arises, is whether Israel really behaves in the discriminatory
manner that is alleged by so many in the international community? Given
the level of threat and violence that is a constant in and around
Israel, it is easy to conclude that Israel discriminates against Arabs.
News broadcasts frequently show IDF soldiers in action against those
who are presented as innocent civilians. Israeli is constantly engaged
in one military operation or another. This supports the easy conclusion
about Israel being discriminatory against Arabs. This conclusion,
however, would be misguided. Instead, it would be more accurate to say
that Israel discriminates against the threat of terror and violence that
she has to deal with. And judging Israel's actions using a standard
for a western country, that is not subject to the same risks and terror
attacks, is not an even playing field. It would be interesting to see
how other peace-seeking countries would respond to the set of
circumstances that Israel finds herself in. I suspect that Israel's
so-called "discrimination" would be seen in an entirely different
light. Using the term "apartheid" to describe Israel is simply an
emotive term trying to play on the ultimate success of the
anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa. There is no link between what
is happening in Israel today, and Apartheid South Africa.

Many
people try to put constant attacks on Israel in the international
community simply down to Israel-hating and Jew-hating. It is easy to
say that these are anti-Semitic activities dressed up with a political
justification, and leave it at that. And, even though much of that is
probably true, I don't feel satisfied with leaving the explanation
there. It is important for me to put this into greater context. I wish
to understand where this comes from, and why it is rearing its head at
this time and in this way.

The anti-Israel activities
that have become common around the world, and which are epitomised in
Israel Apartheid Week, bear resemblance to the wave of anti-Semitism
that was in evidence in the years leading up to the Second World War.
We know that anti-Semitism is an age-old phenomenon that has no real
explanation or justification. We know that it has been allowed to rise
and fall, largely by the general tolerance and acceptance of the general
community. It increased in its intensity when leaders in the
international community have encouraged it, or tolerated it. Hitler's
Germany is the best example when the state encouraged anti-Semitism on
an industrial scale at the highest levels. The man in the street needed
little further encouragement, and the results are one of the most
shameful periods in history. It is my contention that the constant
criticism of Israel at the highest echelons of the international
community, is effectively encouraging the man in the street to believe
that his hatred towards Israel and Jews is justified and consistent with
public opinion. It is inconceivable that Israel justifies being the
one country in the world with more negative resolutions against her at
the UN Security Council, or having a permanent agenda item to answer to
at the UN Human Rights Council. These unjustified actions are
encouraging anti-Semitism on the streets of Europe, the USA and around
the world.

We have just celebrated the Jewish
festival of Purim, that marks victory over unjustified anti-Semitism in
Persia more than 2,000 years ago. It seems that little has changed since then. Not in
the modern-day Persian country of Iran, and not elsewhere around the
world. People are taking their cue from international leaders who find it acceptable to spew venom against Israel at every chance. And to turn international institutions, particularly those connected to the UN, into tools of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment. This provides the green light for people around the world to feel that it is politically correct and acceptable to focus their hatred towards Israel. This is clearly a form of anti-Semitism, in the same way as much of the anti-Israel activity is simply anti-Semitism dressed up to look politically acceptable.

Surely the time has come for international leaders to show true
leadership and stop the discrimination once and for all.

5 comments:

Gerald Levin
said...

Hi. Why is Israel targeted? Well, who is targeting Israel? Is it a group that does not recognise Israel's right to exist? Purim solution: The Third way. 1]Gaza is mandated by Egypt. For this, Egypt will require a United Nations mandate. At present, Egyptian criminals live in Gaza and enjoy diplomatic immunity. In addition, Sinai instability may be reduced.2] Jordan administers trans-Hebron wall (? 17% of West Bank), AND REMAINS THE ONLY PALESTINIAN STATE. The Red sea-Dead sea canal could be built with greater stability; solving Jordan's water priority.3]Israel, Jordan and possibly Egypt join the Commonwealth.

It may seem ironic, but but Jordan and Egypt have it in their interests to have a strong Israel, and not to have terror states on their borders. It is for this reason that they are both helping Israel's cause behind the scenes, while still publicly trying to show their allegiance to the Arab world.

Agreed. They are both stakeholders. An Palestinian Bantustan will affect them both, as it would introduce variables. However, opposing it would introduce variables for them. Thus, a UN resolution would be needed for the 3 state solution.

Getting a UN resolution: What resources to invest? To promote it at all costs? I lobbied for it in 2004, by faxing 80 embassies on P.M. Ariel Sharon's request. Now we have the hindsight of an additional decade; was he wrong? More suggestions for support. Withdrawing from Gaza also now has more support.

About Me

Being a person who holds strong views on many subjects, particularly on matters relating to Israel and the Middle East, this blog gives me the perfect forum to express my opinions. Feedback is always welcome.

Subscribe via email

Email Me

Please send me feedback or subjects that you would like to be discussed.

Chai FM Broadcasts

I can be heard presenting the Israel Update each morning, Monday to Thursday at approximately 07:40 local time (05:50 GMT) on Radio Chai FM. Listeners in the Johannesburg area can tune into 101.9 fm, and listeners from elsewhere can hear the live feed on www.chaifm.com. Podcasts of previous broadcasts can be found on the Chai FM website.